SC247    Topics     News

Top 35 Ocean Carriers 2018: Turnaround time?

The continued rise in fuel prices and chartering rates had a negative impact on the earnings of the top tier carriers for most of 2018. But as new alliances mature, industry experts are forecasting a modest improvement by next year.

Signs of a turnaround in the prospects of global container shipping companies began surfacing last July when rates began creeping up through the peak season. Overcapacity, however, continues to haunt the industry and may keep it from a sustainable recovery.

Maritime analysts at Xeneta, a global benchmarking and market intelligence platform based in Oslo, Norway, note that carriers operating in the trans-Pacific have been able to make their general rate increases (GRIs) stick through early autumn. However, this word of caution comes from Xeneta CEO Patrik Berglund: “Although carriers managed to increase rates by around 7.7% last August, the method remains mostly inefficient. If the full increase were applied, rates would have jumped by more than 20%.” 

Berglund’s observation is mirrored by the Shanghai Containerized Freight Index (SCFI), a weekly index based on estimated freight rates on 15 routes out of Shanghai to different parts of the world. SCFI analysts observe some carriers will manage to become profitable by keeping “spot freight rates” elevated by year’s end. 

They also note some evidence that carriers may reduce supply after the peak season by withdrawing capacity. This particular kind of discipline was not enforced in 2017, however. As a consequence, shippers witnessed a collapse in rates and a weak platform for carriers for the renegotiation of annual contracts.

Lars Jensen, CEO and partner at SeaIntel Maritime Analysis in Copenhagen, says that changes in the liner shipping sector do not take place overnight, and hence “disruption” would be the wrong term to associate with the industry.

“But make no mistake, the industry is in the midst of a fundamental transformation that will make an impact on all stakeholders markedly in the coming years, and one that could remove quite a number of players from the battle field,” says Jensen. “This is why we are, right now, witnessing a reduction in weekly coverage on the main trades. And as we see scores of additional mega-vessels about to be delivered, we will continue to see a reduction in weekly service coverage.”

Zvi Schreiber, CEO of Freightos, an online freight marketplace founded in Tel Aviv, says carriers may be hurting themselves by employing this strategy, especially if carriers try to “signal” rate information to keep them artificially high. “Global freight pricing has been historically opaque, creating an inefficient market that hinders decision-making and wastes money,” he says. 

While it appears that the market is supporting far more robust rates, Schreiber is circumspect when examining this trend. “Current rates reflect a combination of emergency bunker surcharges and shipment surges to beat new import regulations,” he says. “But given ongoing overcapacity, we may see peak season prices reach their apex by this fall, much like 2017.”

Alphaliner Top 35 Ocean Carriers

(Operated fleets as per September 2018)

1 APM-Maersk 3,524,325 714
2 Mediterranean Shg Co 3,086,793 515
3 COSCO Group 2,487,510 479
4 CMA CGM Group 1,799,358 507
5 Hapag-Lloyd 1,501,838 220
6 ONE (Ocean Network Express) 1,045,750 224
7 Evergreen Line 677,703 204
8 Yang Ming Marine Transport Corp. 585,078 103
9 PIL (Pacific Int. Line) 553,048 138
10 Hyundai M. M. 544,504 75
11 Zim 541,100 82
12 Wan Hai Lines 368,620 97
13 IRISL Group 367,249 50
14 KMTC 357,267 67
15 Antong Holdings (QASC) 341,746 115
16 X-Press Feeders Group 232,579 83
17 Zhonggu Logistics Corp. 160,427 98
18 SITC 125,468 83
19 SM Line Corp. 98,747 22
20 TS Lines 94,387 38
21 Arkas Line/EMES 93,769 43
22 Sinotrans 84,737 39
23 Sinokor 74,712 46
24 Salam PacificIndonesia Lines 71,408 53
25 Emirates Shipping Line 67,417 10
26 RCL (Regional Container L.) 66,199 30
27 Grimaldi (Napoli) 53,069 39
28 UniFeeder 52,221 41
29 Swire Shipping 51,549 26
30 Matson 46,274 24
31 Heung-A Shipping 46,227 37
32 Swire Shipping 43,746 29
33 Emirates Shipping Line 43,710 9
34 Matson 43,310 26
35 RCL (Regional Container Line) 42,416 23

Source: Alphaliner. All information above is given as guidance only and in good faith without guarantee. 

Staying on top

Alphaliner’s Top 100 ocean carriers reflects the disruption caused by recent alliances, mergers and acquisitions over the past two years that has reduced the number of lines claiming global market share by half.

Analysts for the Paris-based consultancy have so far identified the top tier players as being fairly stable, but one need only consider the poor performance on 11th-ranked Zim this year to realize carriers continue to struggle.

“The second quarter of 2018 was characterized by the continued rise in fuel prices and chartering rates, as well as low freight rates, all with a negative impact on the results of carriers,” says Eli Glickman, president and CEO of ZIM. In a letter to shareholders, he says ZIM’s recent announcement of long-term strategic cooperation with the 2M Alliance in the Pacific-USEC trade is evidence of the company’s strength, however.

“This agreement is expected to bring considerable efficiencies and savings, along with a far improved service portfolio, supporting ZIM’s strategy going forward,” says Glickman, adding that the agreement is expected to yield better operating efficiencies, reinforce pricing discipline, and keep shippers and cargo owners from engaging in such price-destructive behavior as double-booking their cargo on different sailings without any financial consequences.

Meanwhile, Zim is struggling to keep company with the leaders of the Alphaliner pack comprising Maersk; MSC; COSCO Group; CMA CGM; Hapag-Lloyd; ONE (Ocean Network Express); Evergreen Line; Yang Ming Marine Transport Corp.; and perennial long shot, PIL (Pacific Int. Line).

Analysts for Descartes Datamyne may be well ahead of the curve when it comes to assessing the strengths of carriers in their Darwinian battle for market share. By recognizing that the pace of consolidation has already altered the way brands are perceived and twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) are counted.

pThe one outstanding example of this trend is the ranking of ONE as a single entity rather than breaking out the former Japanese partners as independent carriers. “The amalgamation of K Line, MOL, and NYK container divisions, now operating under a single banner was a game changer,” says Brendan McCahill, senior vice president of global trade data at Descartes Datamyne. “We also have to bear in mind that OOCL is now owned by COSCO, which also had an increase of 10% in TEUs.”

What next?

Given the challenges that all but the top five players have from a cost competitiveness perspective, analysts think that it’s reasonable to assume that there will be some further consolidation. This is in spite of how the sector has distilled into the relatively small number of significant independent carriers today.

“Certainly, it’s not out of the question that the make-up of some of the alliances could see some changes over time,” says Ron Widdows, the current chairman of the World Shipping Council. “But given what has taken place in the last couple years, perhaps things will settle a bit before any further changes take place.”

Meanwhile, a handful of carrier executives are now taking “differentiation” seriously and are undertaking changes in their products and services to target that segment of the market that will value significantly better service that’s reliably delivered.

The challenge here, says Widdows, is that Alliance structures make implementation more difficult, as they don’t control terminal operations. “In my engagement with shippers over the last few years, I get a sense of a growing desire to seek out partners who can positively affect service,” he says.

Trade Wars: Container shipping industry caught in the crossfire

The ongoing expansion of tariffed goods by the Trump Administration is putting the container shipping industry in its “crossfire,” contends Peter Sand, chief shipping analyst for BIMCO, the world’s largest shipowners association comprising a membership that controls around 65% of international tonnage.

“This trade war is constantly developing, in size as well as shape, with nothing looking like an end game yet,” says Sand, adding that ocean cargo shippers are likely to see China using new methods of retaliation targeting service sectors and sources of U.S. investment. “The next steps from the U.S. are constantly changing as well, and the impact on the global shipping industry will depend on the measures taken.”

In a recent interview with Logistics Management, Sand says that shipper apprehension led to an early peak season, with retailers and manufacturers frantically booking freight to avoid further penalties. “This was particularly evident on the trans-Pacific trade lanes, but we see a steep fall-off in demand there, too, by November through early 2019. As a consequence, carriers will drop freight rates dramatically to avoid outright losses.” – Patrick Burnson, executive editor

Widdows is also the executive chairman of American Intermodal Management, which provides shipping, logistics, terminals and intermodal transportation consultancy services globally. Something of a legend in the ocean carrier arena, he served as the CEO of Rickmers Holding, based in Hamburg, Germany from April 2012 to April 2014. Prior to joining Rickmers, Widdows was group president and CEO of Neptune Orient Lines, the parent company of APL. His career with NOL/APL spanned more than 30 years.

“So, over the years, I’ve been with companies that had built a ‘service excellent’ carrier model, and a shipper portfolio that was based on accessing a disproportionate participation with those who would pay more,” says Widdows. The key objective, he adds, is for carriers to identify shippers who are less reliant on seasonal consumer demands and more willing to strike a profitable balance.

“This is especially true for shippers who need support for inland intermodal networks and equipment,” adds Widdows. “That portfolio produces a better bottom line for the carriers while giving them wider access to shippers seeking more value.” 

Rewarding service Shippers do indeed recognize carriers that are willing to go that extra mile, says Peter Friedmann, executive director of the The Agriculture Transportation Coalition (AgTC). “With fewer top container lines vying for our business, it’s especially critical for us to give credit to those that deliver on their promises,” he says.

Each year, ocean carriers await the result of the AgTC’s Annual Survey, which ranks the carriers from best to worst. It has served to motivate some carriers to work with agriculture shippers to improve documentation and booking service. Hamburg Süd, Hyundai Merchant Marine and OOCL were the three highest ranked carriers in 2018.

“The survey ranks the different ocean carriers on such criteria as availability of equipment, availability of space on vessels, document accuracy and efficiency,” says Friedmann. “As shippers of time-critical commodities, we’re especially sensitive to a carrier’s willingness to accept export documentation as late as possible and adhere to advertised versus actual vessel schedule and transit time.”

Furthermore, adds Friedmann, carriers who deliver on their promises will capture more volume from Ag shippers who are willing to pay a premium price. “It’s a good situation for everyone,” he concludes. “And it may be the only way to keep the top carriers in business.” 

Article Topics

About the Author

Patrick Burnson's avatar
Patrick Burnson
Mr. Burnson is a widely-published writer and editor specializing in international trade, global logistics, and supply chain management. He is based in San Francisco, where he provides a Pacific Rim perspective on industry trends and forecasts.
Follow Logistics Management on FaceBook

Latest News & Resources


Featured Downloads

Rapidly Improve the Performance of Your Warehouse Logistics
Rapidly Improve the Performance of Your Warehouse Logistics
The Rapid Performance Evaluation identifies opportunities and potential improvements in every aspect of warehouse logistics operations; performance, productivity, service, quality, and systems.
Resource Management System (RMS): How to Effectively Leverage Your Assets
Resource Management System (RMS): How to Effectively Leverage Your Assets
This guide provides an in-depth analysis of the potential of various resources available in a warehouse and how they can be utilized...

Sustainable Supply Chain Insights From PITT OHIO
Sustainable Supply Chain Insights From PITT OHIO
A whitepaper on supply chain insights gleaned at the LEED-certified gold Cleveland transportation and sustainability summit.
20 Warehouse & Distribution Center Best Practices for Your Supply Chain
20 Warehouse & Distribution Center Best Practices for Your Supply Chain
In this guide, we picked the brains of our supply chain engineers to find ways to improve warehouse and distribution center efficiency...
SOLOCHAIN WMS plus a Guide to Warehouse Management Systems
SOLOCHAIN WMS plus a Guide to Warehouse Management Systems
In these 2 'papers' Solochain WMS, we detail Manufacturing Execution System capabilities and Generix's portfolio of SCM solutions to manage all distribution logistics,...